Hi all,

I have a program which contains a select of a table. And, a 2nd program
which contains an insert to the same table.

The 2 programs are being executed concurrently hundreds of times per minute.
Will Oracle be able to handle this without any problem, e.g. locking
problem? Is there anything special I should do to this table, so to
prevent problems?

Thanks

"Bill" <bli01@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:10p7cjkf9d2mqa5@corp.supernews.com...
> Hi all,
>
> I have a program which contains a select of a table. And, a 2nd program
> which contains an insert to the same table.
>
> The 2 programs are being executed concurrently hundreds of times per
> minute.
> Will Oracle be able to handle this without any problem, e.g. locking
> problem? Is there anything special I should do to this table, so to
> prevent problems?
>
> Thanks
>
>

as long as the machine can cope with the number of transactions then yes,
oracle will because reads do not block writes and vice versa

p.s. always mention version

The Oracle version is 9.0.1.

When you said as long as the machine can cope, do you mean the processor
speed?

Also, is there any Oracle configuration parameters that should be noted to
accomodate such transaction requirement?

Thanks


"Dave" <x@x.com> wrote in message
news:xEOkd.12243$up1.9668@text.news.blueyonder.co. uk...

"Bill" <bli01@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:10p7cjkf9d2mqa5@corp.supernews.com...
> Hi all,
>
> I have a program which contains a select of a table. And, a 2nd program
> which contains an insert to the same table.
>
> The 2 programs are being executed concurrently hundreds of times per
> minute.
> Will Oracle be able to handle this without any problem, e.g. locking
> problem? Is there anything special I should do to this table, so to
> prevent problems?
>
> Thanks
>
>

as long as the machine can cope with the number of transactions then yes,
oracle will because reads do not block writes and vice versa

p.s. always mention version

Bill,

Just use automatic UNDO and ensure that your transactions are not long
running. Also, upgrade to 9.2.0.4 at a minimum. Great performance
improvements will be realized.

Al

Bill wrote:

> The Oracle version is 9.0.1.
>
> When you said as long as the machine can cope, do you mean the processor
> speed?
>
> Also, is there any Oracle configuration parameters that should be noted to
> accomodate such transaction requirement?
>
> Thanks
>
>
> "Dave" <x@x.com> wrote in message
> news:xEOkd.12243$up1.9668@text.news.blueyonder.co. uk...
>
> "Bill" <bli01@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:10p7cjkf9d2mqa5@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>Hi all,
>>
>>I have a program which contains a select of a table. And, a 2nd program
>>which contains an insert to the same table.
>>
>>The 2 programs are being executed concurrently hundreds of times per
>>minute.
>>Will Oracle be able to handle this without any problem, e.g. locking
>>problem? Is there anything special I should do to this table, so to
>>prevent problems?
>>
>>Thanks
>>
>>
>
>
> as long as the machine can cope with the number of transactions then yes,
> oracle will because reads do not block writes and vice versa
>
> p.s. always mention version
>
>
>

"b" <b@aol.com> wrote in message
news:VARkd.6214$jE2.4223@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
> Bill,
>
> Just use automatic UNDO and ensure that your transactions are not long
> running. Also, upgrade to 9.2.0.4 at a minimum. Great performance
> improvements will be realized.
>



What if the code is crap? 9.2 wont perform much better than 9.0.1

Bill - yes i meant cpu, plus also memory disk. Oracle is pretty good at
multiversioning :-)

"Bill" <bli01@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<10p7enomdndkva8@corp.supernews.com>...
> The Oracle version is 9.0.1.
>
> When you said as long as the machine can cope, do you mean the processor
> speed?
>
> Also, is there any Oracle configuration parameters that should be noted to
> accomodate such transaction requirement?
>
> Thanks
>
>
> "Dave" <x@x.com> wrote in message
> news:xEOkd.12243$up1.9668@text.news.blueyonder.co. uk...
>
> "Bill" <bli01@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:10p7cjkf9d2mqa5@corp.supernews.com...
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I have a program which contains a select of a table. And, a 2nd program
> > which contains an insert to the same table.
> >
> > The 2 programs are being executed concurrently hundreds of times per
> > minute.
> > Will Oracle be able to handle this without any problem, e.g. locking
> > problem? Is there anything special I should do to this table, so to
> > prevent problems?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
>
> as long as the machine can cope with the number of transactions then yes,
> oracle will because reads do not block writes and vice versa
>
> p.s. always mention version

Not really a simple question, Bill. It depends on what the program is
doing. For example, if the select program starts a transaction and
then holds it a long time, Oracle needs to be able to keep the data to
be able to reconstruct a read-consistent view of the data in spite of
the other program inserting. If you have many users doing this, it
can add up. If you just have one user doing it for a reallllly long
time (say, a month-end batch), you can run into undo or rbs issues
(depending on which you are using).

There are configuration parameters, but they should only be modified
with a proper tuning methodology, which is normally an iterative
process. Most tuning for this sort of thing is application tuning.
If the insert program was originally written for another type of
database engine (or by someone trained that way), it could be
"incorrect" from the Oracle perspective of writers not blocking
readers and vice versa. Also, certain selects benefit from
modification of certain parameters, but that usually can (or should)
be set at the session level rather than the instance.

So, "it depends."

I'm sure Dave could be referring to any hardware parameters including
cpu and i/o rates. The bottleneck can change severely with small
changes in app code or tuning, or even usage at the limit.

jg
--
@home.com is bogus.
"sux – oracle" - suse oracle install

Bill wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I have a program which contains a select of a table. And, a 2nd program
> which contains an insert to the same table.
>
> The 2 programs are being executed concurrently hundreds of times per minute.
> Will Oracle be able to handle this without any problem, e.g. locking
> problem? Is there anything special I should do to this table, so to
> prevent problems?
>
> Thanks

Hundreds? It can handle thousands ... tens of thousands.

Assuming you wrote decent code and didn't both installation
and configuration parameters and your hardware isn't mediocre.
--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)

Bill wrote:

> The Oracle version is 9.0.1.
>
> When you said as long as the machine can cope, do you mean the processor
> speed?
>
> Also, is there any Oracle configuration parameters that should be noted to
> accomodate such transaction requirement?
>
> Thanks

CPU is pretty irrelevant to disk activity. The quesion is more one of
bus speed, i/o, and disk transfer rate.

--
Daniel A. Morgan
University of Washington
damorgan@x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with 'u' to respond)

Hello Folks,

Oracle does not have something like read locks. But if the transactions
(inserts) does happen parallel there are a few things you should take
care about. Like, which is in my eyes most important, the INITTRANS
value (default is 1) with wich you create your table. Increase on for
each concurrent transaction.

Greetings,
Michael